ArticleBMC public health2023
"Figuring stuff out myself" - a qualitative study on maternal vaccination in socially and ethnically diverse areas in England.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Facilitators and barriers to vaccination uptake in pregnancy: A qualitative systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Interventions to increase vaccination against COVID-19, influenza and pertussis during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of travel medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Factors associated with vaccination intentions and uptake among pregnant women in the UK: A scoping review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Perceived barriers to accessing vaccination plans in pregnant women in Chile: a qualitative analysis.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Influenza and Pertussis Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review of Vaccination Rates and Vaccination Determinants.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Factors associated with tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap) vaccination acceptance among pregnant women: a cross-sectional study.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Impacts of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Misinformation in Digital Spaces on Human Rights Protection and Promotion: Scoping Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Maternal vaccination service provision in London and Liverpool: Organisation, recording of vaccinations and midwife training.Future healthcare journal · 2025Article
- Challenges and opportunities of vaccination during pregnancy: perspectives of 20 healthcare professionals.Journal of public health policy · 2025Article
- A qualitative study on barriers and facilitators of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy among pregnant women in Malaysia.PloS one · 2025Article
- Attitude to RSV Vaccination Among a Cohort of Pregnant Women in Jordan: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Navigating vaccination in pregnancy: Qualitative study in 21 ethnically diverse pregnant women.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMaternal vaccinations against Influenza, Pertussis, and Covid-19 are recommended in the UK, and vaccines against further infections may become available soon. However, many pregnant women, especially in socially and ethnically diverse areas, have low vaccine uptake. Qualitative studies on the reasons and possible solutions are needed that are inclusive of disadvantaged and minority ethnic groups. We therefore aimed to understand the complex interplay between structural and behavioural factors contributing to the low maternal vaccine uptake in socially and ethnically diverse areas in London in the Covid-19 context.
methodsIn 2022, we conducted semi-structured interviews and a focus group discussion among a purposive sample of 38 pregnant/recently pregnant women and 20 health service providers, including 12 midwives. Participants were recruited in ethnically diverse London boroughs. We followed a critical realist paradigm and used a thematic analysis approach.
resultsThe sample included participants who took all, some or none of the maternal vaccines, with some participants unsure whether they had taken or been offered the vaccines. Decision-making was passive or active, with the expectation for pregnant women to do their 'own research'. Participants described various individual, social and contextual influences on their decision-making as they navigated the antenatal care system. Missing or conflicting information from providers meant knowledge gaps were sometimes filled with misinformation from unreliable sources that increased uncertainties and mistrust. Both pregnant women and providers described structural and organisational factors that hindered access to information and vaccinations, including lack of training, time and resources, and shortcomings of health information systems and apps. Some participants described factors that facilitated vaccination uptake and many made recommendations for improvements.
conclusionsOur study showed how structural and organisational factors can compound uncertainties around maternal vaccination among socially and ethnically diverse populations. Results highlight the need for more reliable resources, streamlined workflows, improved electronic information systems and training in their use. Roles and responsibilities should be clarified with potential greater involvement of nurses and pharmacists in vaccine provision. Education and communication should consider individual (language/digital) skills and needs for information and reassurance. Further research is needed to co-produce solutions with service users and providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.